Posted
by
timothy
on Tuesday July 27, 2004 @07:42PM
from the citizens-for-sale dept.

Combuchan writes "Just when you thought that pages on your local government's website were the last bastion of the advertisement-free WWW, that may soon change. Maricopa County (seen on slashdot before), home to 3.4 million people in the Phoenix metropolitan area, has seen their GIS website "become an every day tool for realtors, developers, mortgage and title companies, appraisers, inspectors, attorneys and many other professionals associated with the real estate industry." As a result, they are now accepting bids for Web advertisements. As the county is one of the best-run in the nation, this could set quite the precedent."

Uh, I love cynical posts like this. Hey brother, let me help you out. Government has a pricetag, and projects we like sometimes don't get the money they need. This is because government has to jump through a lot of hoops to get bonds and such passed, so generally they have a finitie amount of money for everything they have to do. For little projects like GIS datasets, which are EXTREMELY expensive to produce and yet most residents expect them to be free, people have to get a little creative. The US Gov

Although that AC probably posted using a computer built by (atleast the components) one or more corporations, with Internet connection made possible by one or more corporations, on a board owned by a corporation.

Ads are good for covering costs, however they are also completely inappropriate for any service rendered by state authority. I'm not into US or Arizona or this particular county legislature, but if somebody would be able to promote itself on government owned web site, while somebody else couldn't, the whole thing could be seen as a governement endorsment of certain business. This in my eyes would be alost like Bush renting the White House lawn for McDonalds arches. He might be a monkey, but certain things e

Like a politician, you have overlooked the most obvious and efficient solution: cut spending. Reduce the scope and power of government. Let people decide for themselves where to direct their money.

Personally, I don't recieve a return on approximately 95% of what I pay taxes for. Did you know that the average US citizen pays nearly 50% of their yearly earnings to government through federal, state, and local taxes combined? Do you really think government knows better how to spend this money than you, the one

The Mafia could also pay, but then the government would be responsible to them. That's the issue. It's not that they're being paid, but it's the fact they're being paid by a company. A private entity. That means they are in their pocket. They have a responsibility to their sponsors. Even if the responsibility is 0, it's still a conflict of interest, and something you should be very worried about indeed. They're public servants, not corporate servants. sheesh.

As a home owner, I can tell you that taxable value of a home is quite different then the market value, and they don't usually have one to one relationship. I'd say that you are trying to force the relationship on it just to prove your point.

For example, painting the house with a popular color may bring up the market value but it will not bring up your taxable value, whereas adding a bedroom may bring both of them up (although not equally).

As the site has a very clean and professional look, as oppose to very corporate sites...

The last three pages of the linked PDF [maricopa.gov] discussing where ads might end up may very well change your opinion. I thought this was merely the addition of three text ads on the actual GIS application, but they're really going all out.

I don't blame the county for doing this, all in all. From an urban-planning geek's perspective, it's one of the coolest local sites I know of. But serving 300,000 a month with what I assume to be an intensive GIS application can't be cheap.

The notion of having a user "pay" for government services rendered is of course nothing new (have you seen what some cities charge for copying fees?), and this really is an extension of that concept to the Internet.

But where does it stop? Where, for example, is the line drawn between a local government's Tourism Bureau and an all-out travel information website with hotel reservations, tickets to local shows, maps, guides, and whathaveyou? If you run a site like that, do you want to be competing against your Government?

Where, for example, is the line drawn between a local government's Tourism Bureau and an all-out travel information website

There isn't one. And why should there be? Government, especially on the local level, isn't separate from the people, it IS the people. We've just become so used to our interests differing from those of politicians that we've become out of sync with what government is. If the people of a town need tourism, and they decide to vote for a Councilman on the basis of creating a Bureau,

The best government is local. It's a lot easier to go and complain about something to your neighbor than it is to someone separated from you (in the county seat, the state capitol, or Washington).

We've sort of got the whole government concept thing turned upside down - most money should stay local and most services should stay local. Instead the local governments have to live off of the scraps left over by the other levels of government.

I dunno about that. There are a lot of programs that just wouldn't work on a local level. Social welfare programs, for example, benefit greatly from spreading the tax burden across regions. Defense benefits from a central authority. Not to mention ubiquitous interstate highways.

In fact, our government works really well, when you get down to it. Yeah, there's pork...but there's always going to be. Yeah, there's a lot of tragic stupidity...but we know about it, and we have the power to fix it. I can't

Defense is a legitimate function of the federal government as are the interstates. Financial regulation is also a proper function - a stable banking sector is the cornerstone of a good economy. I'm not so sure that social welfare programs are - but that's another issue.

I'm on the city council of a small town and I also do tax preparation work. I know how much money flows out of the area to both the state and federal governments, and I know what pittance we have to left over to run the town.

This won't help lower taxes, it will raise them. You see someone (political connected) will 'have' to be hired to managed the ad program. And since the persons salery will come out of a different budget pool they will still make it look like the ad program is bringing in more than it is.

See, the US government can operate on deficit spending. Many states can do this as well. A county cannot -- and counties just don't get that much tax. The budget is small and set...you know exactly how much money and how much help you have for the year, and you make do with that. Many places will have some positions that are only allowed to work 10 or 20 paid hours a week.

Local and regional governments get around this by buying packages of software and services with a

A government earning money instead of forcing its citizens to supply it under threat of force.

If you don't like taxes there must be some country on Earth where citizens pay none. I mean it's just so outdated. The US Mint makes the money, why can't they just make extra and give it to the government?

The mint and BEP are the only two goverment entities that consistantly make money. They create the stuff and they basically 'sell' it at face value. The margins on coin are low, but they still make a mint. nyuck nyuck.

The United States Postal Service sell advertising. Put in a change of address recently and the confirmation letter's envelope from them contained serveral ad

"Gee, Bob, we really like the way you shut down those communist open source advocates from following your own mandates. And we're pleased as punch that you've faithfully upgraded your systems every year. But the icing on the cake is how you've required the users of your system to use an MS operating syste

The government has a responsibility for its citizens. Its primary objective is to take care of them, not to earn money. To do the job, though, they need money, which should come from those it takes care of - the citizens.

Here's the deal, I'll pretend that government is "company" when they let me opt out of their laws and their taxes.

Absolutely. That is called freedom. A few, basic laws maintained by a minimal government requiring minimal taxes. Even better if the government can generate the funds on its own. Now you're thinking like a Libertarian, hooray.

Your standard punch the fucking monkey in the balls to win a free root canal and lobotomy combo performed by a spider from Hell banner ad is why ad blockers were invented, and their mere existence is enough to make those who purvey standard size ads unworthy of my attention, ever. In my view, nearly all standard sized advertisements (banners, skyscrapers, blah whatever) are trash and get treated like the trash they are.

As always, ye who gives the county much needed revenue through advertising gets special treatment when you need a favor from the country should something go arwy. Same thing as cop cars with coporate advertising awhile back; if there was a protest at the local mcdonalds, and the cop cars adorn the corporate logo of mcdonalds, the cops would be there quicker to help out mcdonalds than, say, some local woman who just got raped.

I spose this is what we get for putting people in power who want government to make good business sense.

NP, although, you may want to go out and do something else than spend 4+ hours a day (as per indicated by your profile) browsing slashdot. You'll go insane and your head will explode. Unless you're an admin, inwhich case nice job shooting down the ravenous monkeys with a 10-gauge you crazy crazy nutcase.

Has anyone noticed that the site actually prevents non win98/nt/xp/me/ie4 from viewing it. It doesn't just not work it actually is prevented. It smells like discrimination to me. OF course/.ers won't think so because they acn change. But then/.ers are wrong and stupid.
Hint mod this down so I don't have excelent karma and get more mod points.

It uses a MapGuide plugin which isn't available for anything beyond IE. When you're dealing with GIS data, I'm not sure you can really be that choosy about the format. If there's only a reasonable cost to make the data more accessible you have a shot at converting it, but I don't think that's likely.

Maricopa County is only "well-run" if you think it's a good idea to build a city of millions in the middle of the desert, hundreds of miles from the nearest renewable source of water and sustainable agriculture. If you consider those minor matters of survival, it's a fucking disaster.

Let Maricopa County have advertisers on their real estate website. That will distract people from the fact that they're buying land in the desert

The truth of the matter is that there is quite a bit of agriculture in the Phoenix area. Mostly citrus (it's on the state seal), but you can also see corn and various other things being grown if you drive to some of the outlying areas of the city. There are also a number of lakes within an hour's drive of the city. The Salt River used to run right through Tempe (until they dammed it up for some reason or another--a number of canals run through the city). You can, however, bring your own beer and tube do

Yes, I am painfully aware of the agriculture practiced in Arizona. My tax dollars are subsidizing it to the tune of about $1000 per dollar of produced crop, mostly in the form of water projects.

Here's some stats for you on Maricopa County's water supply. The basins and aquifers contain about 175 million acre-feet of water. This is the bit the county has rights to. The county's water use is over 2 million acre-feet per year. The groundwater recharge rate is a pathetic 150,000 acre-feet per year, on average. The aquifer will be depleted in 60 years, according to Maricopa County's own, very optimistic estimates.

Now, riddle me this. Is it wise to invest in real estate in an area that will have pissed away its water supply in less than a century?

Furthermore I'd like to point out that much of Maricopa's and Arizona's surface water supply, for the bastardization of agriculture they tend to practice in that region, is piped in from the Colorado River, which aquatic system had to be ruined to support ambitious Arizona land owners, at the expense of everyone else.

Come on.
Everyone from Phoenix remebers that it goes:"HoHo!HaHa!HeeHee!HaHa!"

Go ahead and call the 5th largest city in the country a disaster because its in the middle of the desert. You can even make fun of the Good 'Ol Boy sheriff.But never under any circumstances disrespect the greatest TV show of all time!

Obviously, you don't know much about Phoenix history. Phoenix has been a rich place of agriculture with plenty of water to sustain multiple cultures throughout history.

The prehistoric Hohokam Indians first settled the area about 300 B.C. and dug a system of extensive irrigation canals for farming. This system included over 300 miles of major canals, which took its water from the Gila, Salt, San Pedro and Santa Cruz rivers. This water was then used to support thousands of acres of farm land. Much of Phoenix

The Hohokam had a peak population of less than 50,000 people, and their society collapsed. Some people think the Hohokam society collapsed because their irrigation technology overextended the population, which was then wiped out by drought and poor soil management. I see a parallel with Maricopa County. Yes, technology allows 4 million people to live in the desert. But in adverse conditions, the Maricopa County society is just as apt to evaporate as the Hohokam did 600 years ago.

The Hohokam had a peak population of less than 50,000 people, and their society collapsed. Some people think the Hohokam society collapsed because their irrigation technology overextended the population, which was then wiped out by drought and poor soil management. I see a parallel with Maricopa County. Yes, technology allows 4 million people to live in the desert. But in adverse conditions, the Maricopa County society is just as apt to evaporate as the Hohokam did 600 years ago.

Schools aren't really part of the legislative/judical/executive system though.. Actually, I can remember one example a while ago -- wasn't there some police department somewhere that was going to put ads on their police cruisers?

My first thought here is, what happens if the John Kerry for President campaign comes to these people and asks to buy ad space? Do they accept? Would it be ethical for them to accept? Would it be ethical for them to decline?

Isn't Arizona supposed to be one of the big contested states in the next election?

Expensive, yes. Overpriced, no. ESRI's stuff is far and away the best integrated and best functioning suite of GIS tools I've used...much easier and more flexible than the tools from MapInfo, and lightyears -- milllions of them -- ahead of anything the OSS community has come up with.

As soon as something can approach the functionality and usability of ArcInfo, I will gladly agree with you. But as it stands, ESRI's stuff isn't overpriced so much as everything else is under-engineered (and it shows!)

ArcGIS 9 can actually be called a real GIS again, 8 lacked a bunch of stuff. I'm not expecting to see a OSS contender any time soon, the pool of likely users is not comparable to something like OOffice or GIMP.

On the web-end OTOH, GIS is a commodity (i.e. WFS, WMS) and the OSS alternatives to things like ArcIMS are very capable, and in many instances much more stable/reliable.

I'm also interested to see where ArcSDE goes, it's chief advntage over things like Oracle Spatial is the tight integration with the

Government is here to make people happy, right?
Well, people are happy when they have money.
People only have money if the economy is good.
The economy is only good when people are buying.
People only buy things when they want something want.
People generally don't need things they want and soon forget about those things.
Ads remind people of those things.
Thus, advertising on a government web site is a community service.

So what's the moral of this story? I guess it's that politicians are irresponsible/a

...it seems that few people are actually following any links before posting corporate conspiracy theories.

Now, I will admit that there's something slightly unsettling about a government giving official coverage to particular businesses. Though, as pointed out above, it may be better than taxes.

But in any event, these ads are specifically for their GIS (Geographic Information Systems) portal. That's relatively specialized stuff - people visiting it (property owners and developers) have a pretty high probability of needing some kind of service the businesses advertise there. If they don't see the ad there, they'll go to the Yellow Pages - so who do you want the money to go to, the local gov or the telecoms?

While this still strikes me as a little odd, it's not like Aunt Tilly is going to be checking a web site for the garbage pickup schedule and be confronted with flashing ambulance chaser ads or something.

"Now, I will admit that there's something slightly unsettling about a government giving official coverage to particular businesses"

Ever seen a bulletin board at a public library? Been to a city hall anywhere? They have tons of info on local business. Part of local governments job these days is promoting the local business community for sake of tourism and economic growth. It's nothing new or strange.

My other job, my non-geek job, is that of firefighter. Its a volunteer "on call" community. I see the fights they have go through to replace a $50 coupling let alone a few thousand dollars of hose line.

As far as I'm concerned, if NIKE wanted to put their logo on a few hundred feed of high quality inch and three quarter line, I know a whole lot of departments that would be very very happy about it.

What to a small town fire department is a huge expense, is less than sending a sales guy to a meeting for corporate America. Think of the impact that could make.

Most counties are forbidden by their state laws to run a deficit. Most States in the US can't run a deficit by their own State Constitutions. An increase in income should be offset by a tax break. Of course they will find a stupid way to waste it.

Most Americans would bitch less about taxes if the money they sent in was spent wisely. Most is wasted.

I think I would totally agree that the Government should have advertisements to raise revenue IF AND ONLY IF there is a "non-advertisement" text only version for website that is available on a splash page, before any advertisements are viewed.

If you look at other government events, they often will partner with other commercial entities, heck even government literature is often sponsored by third parties who are partners. What is the logic be

I'm torn also.I dislike that while I'm forced to sit in the MVD, that I also have to be subjected to advertisements on the overhead screens and banners. It will be interesting to see if the government ever gets sued for "suggesting" a particular company in this way.

But... I like the idea that perhaps my property taxes will not go up as fast, or *gasp* go down, if I (and others) click on these ads on a regular basis.

My problem with ads in government is that if the government forces me to a particular place

As a resident of Maricopa County for almost twenty years -- and one who has been waiting about that long for a proper public transit system -- I cry Bullshit.
Phoenix has a wide variety of things going for it... but good government is not one of them...

If the USPS (Postal Service) can give a contract to AOL so that space is allowed for AOL CD's with a USPS sticker, why can't every state, county, city or even the water department office sell advertising?

The USPS says AOL is providing a service by letting people know there is an easy way to get on the internet (or some trivia like that).
Note that we pay taxes to support the USPS and a place to hold AOL CD's.

No- I don't think so. Given what the WTO has been pulling, there ain't no such thing as a non-corupted politician ANYWHERE in the world. Not the US, not the EU, not Asia, and certainly not in the third world.

They've all been bought and paid for by the corporations in one way or another.

dude, you do realize that Google DOES have sponsored advertisements right? Sure they are not very invasive, but who says the government website's ads will necessarily be invasive? I don't get the logic...